| Posted By |
Topic: Atheist (thinking of coming to Islam)
|
|
 MBobby
|
|
|
|
M. Bobby Usman Ibn Soliman
(Yorkshire)
|
|
Member
Posts: 3
Joined: Sep 2008
|
Hi there. This may seem strange but my situation is this I am a Pakistani, when I was about 18 I left Islam for atheism all my family are Muslims (Including my wife) when I was 18 I had an mind which questioned everything. I never learned arabic I was forced to go to the masjid when I was younger.
One day I was sitting and reading the 99 attributes of Allah when I started to question thinks, to cut the long story short over a period of few years I realized a god cannot logically exist, so I stopped believing in Allah. Muslims made me very angry I thought it was stupid to believe in god. But I just didn't say anything.
I was like this, and I enjoyed my life like this last year my mom asked me to get married and I told her I didn't want to, but she had recently had a stroke and I thought she might die and for her sake I agreed to getting an arranged marriage, so I went to Pakistan saw the girl she was practicing Muslim and was in hijab I told the family I want to talk to her families agreed, we sat in a separate room I asked her if she wanted to marry me and she said yes, I told my family and we got married. On the second night after being married me and my wife had a little argument. I said I hated all this stupid things like doing to the daarbars (Sufi Shrines) and she agreed and I was suprised she agreed so then I said something about Allah and she told me to stop and put her hand on my mouth and told me never to say what I was going to say. I saw the shock in her eyes it was like something had died inside her. So I didn't talk about it.
I stayed with her for about a month and I came back to England and I still thought Islam is false.
Now I really don't know even though I think god cannot exist something within my is almost like pulling me to more fundamental Islam like if I look at Sufism or Shiaism does not make sense to me, but real hardcore Islam makes sense to me. I don't like apologetic Islam much... that doesn't mean I agree with terrorism and stuff I don't and I am completely against and opposed to that.
Regards,
|
|
| Umm.Jamila.Hibo
|
|
|
|
umm thaabit bint Abdillaah
(unspecified)
|
|
Member
Posts: 9
Joined: Mar 2005
|
|
| sajid_chauhan_81
|
|
|
|
unspecified ساجد
(Mumbai (India))
|
|
Member
Posts: 2031
Joined: Jul 2005
|
|
Please visit www.islaam.ca . Particularly the sections on "What is Islam" and "Monotheism"
|
|
| msaqib2
|
|
|
|
Saqib Punjaabi
(from Yorkshire )
|
|
Member
Posts: 141
Joined: Dec 2006
|
If you would like to listen to some audio (instead of reading a book) then there is much available.
For a logical explaination of the belief, the flaws in atheism, etc, then you can try the following links,
The Truth about Islam - Part 1 of 2 (click here for audio)
[url=http://www.sunnahaudio.com/audio/truthaboutislam2.mp3]The Truth about Islam - Part 2 of 2 (click here for audio)[/url]
(in the English Language by Malik Ben Adam from America)
Please note the first minute is in Arabic and the rest of the speech is in English.
Also [url=http://www.islaam.ca/what-is-islam-/purpose-of-life/why-should-you-be-muslim.html]An Invitation to Think - Why Should 'You' be Muslim? (audio - click here)[/url]
-- by David Adeeb (Reverted African-American Muslim)
And there are many other audios, videos, articles, books and information on the 'real' teachings of Islam which you can get access to.
If you go websites such as [url=http://www.SalafiAudio.com]SalafiAudio.com[/url] or [url=http://www.SunnahAudio.com]SunnahAudio.com[/url] and others, then go to the section entitled "Deviations". You will find the position of the muslims AGAINST terrorism -- in English, Arabic and Somali, etc.
Also [url=http://www.islaam.ca/downloads/islamswaronterror.pdf]Click Here for one of the many leaflets against Terrorism[/url]
You will also find Refutation of the stupid Sufi beliefs (many of which go AGAINST the teachings of Islam).
Sufism is an alien\foriegn belief to Islam. There is a famous couplet which is;
Question: "How do you prove a Sufi wrong?"
Answer: "You show him the Quran."
This is because many of the beliefs and practices of the extreme Sufi's go against the teachings of the Quran.
And remeber that if someone tells you anything about islam, then ask them for the evidence ("where does it say this in the Quran or where does it say this in the Hadith").
The real muslims will always give you evidence (either on the spot or will come back to you with the evidence, inshallah).
---------------
Myself being a Pakistani (and an ex-Sufi from Bradford), i personally know that the Sufi's do dumb things at dar-bars (and they commit 'Shirk' -- which is to worship others along with Allah\God).
The Sufi people use the term "Wahabi" for all muslims who are not like them. Even you will be called a Wabi for not being like them.
Let me ask you something -- You may have heard that "islam is for ALL of mankind", and "soo many people are accepting Islam every day" and "Islam is the fastest religion in the world", etc... I am sure that you will agree that they will NOT be in "UK Pakistani Mosques".
- Have you seen many converts inside "Pakistani\Sufi mosques"?
The answer is "No".
Because when a non-Muslim accepts islam, then this person does it because of his or her own free-will. They read the translation of the meaning of the Quran in their own language ([url=http://www.inf.brad.ac.uk/~msaqib2/The_Noble_Quraan.chm]like in the English language[/url]) and if they like it, then they accept this.
And you will find white-muslims and black-muslims and chinese-muslims, and other types of muslims ALL keeping away from the Sufis.
Islam is for all of mankind.
So why do you only find Pakistani's within "Pakistani Mosques"?
Why do you only find Bangladeshi's within "Bangladeshi Mosques"?
Because many from amongst them are Sufi people and Sufi people don't follow the real teachings of Islam properly.
Islam is not only for the Pakistani people or for this-people or that-people, it is for ALL OF MANKIND -- Find out yourself by reading the Quran translated meanings within the English Language.
[url=http://www.inf.brad.ac.uk/~msaqib2/The_Noble_Quraan.chm]The Quran -- in English Language (click here)[/url]
Also, read the books of that person that all the Sufi people are affraid of.
Read the book of Abdul-Wahab (and Abdul-Wahab is that man who the Sufi people are scared of).
[url=kitab_at_tawheed.pdf]Kitab at-Tawheed (click here)[/url] -- Read this and find out.
And read the book of Abdul-Wahab (that man who openly said to the world that Sufi people are wrong, and until this day, the Sufi people hate him and are affraid of what he said because he used the Quran against them).
Read his book, [url=kitab_at_tawheed.pdf]Kitab at-Tawheed (click here)[/url] and [url=http://www.al-ibaanah.com/cms/pdf_files/53.pdf]The 3 Fundamental Principles (click here)[/url] (which is (i) information with evidence about your Lord, (ii) information with evidence about your deen\religion, and (iii) information with evidence about your Prophet) -- this book starts on Page 6 of this file.
---------------
There are many other things i can also direct you towards.
But to keep it short, it is best to contact the Salafi Bookstore & Islamic Information Centre (nearest place in Yorkshire is in Bradford, on Lumb Lane (near the zebra crossing), BD8 7SP).
Go there and find out if you have any other questions left.
Tel: (0121) 773-0033
(if you live in another city, then please mention this and we can provide information on another centre that is more near to where you live).
And remeber that if someone tells you anything about islam, then ask them for the evidence ("where does it say this in the Quran or where does it say this in the Hadith").
The real muslims will always give you evidence (either on the spot or will come back to you with the evidence, inshallah).
|
|
| ibnwaheed
|
|
|
|
unspecified Hassan bin Waheed
(Teaneck, NJ, USA)
|
|
Member
Posts: 54
Joined: Jun 2008
|
The Truth About Islam - From Sacred Scriptures, Science and Sound Logic
Our brother, Abul-Hasan Maalik Ibn Aadam, presents this detailed study into the Religion of Islam, drawing upon not only religious scripture, but also the statements of well-respected scientists like Albert Einstein amongst others. He also draws heavily upon research studies on issues such as adultery in the United States, all of which point to the validity and justification of Islam in western society.
http://www.sunnahaudio.com/audio/truthaboutislam1.mp3
http://www.sunnahaudio.com/audio/truthaboutislam2.mp3
|
|
| Adnaan.ibn.Salman
|
|
|
|
Abu 'Abdirrahmaan Adnaan ibn Salman
(Birmingham, UK.)
|
|
Member
Posts: 76
Joined: Apr 2005
|
Bismillaahirrahmaanirraheem,
May Allaah grant us and you firmness upon His Deen, free from any distortions.
I remember, while at university, the doubts which the scientists and their like used to present, to the extent that even some of the Muslims felt uncertain. However, in reality the belief of the scientists is only founded on doubts and contains no certainty. As Allaah says:
ııııı ıııııı ıııııııııııı ııııı ıııııııı
"Indeed the plot of Shaytaan is ever weak" 4:76
Also, if one has any exposure to the kuffaar, and sees how they immerse themselves in their base desires, in complete heedlessness of the closeness of death and the beauty and significance of Allaah's creation etc., one can see how filthy the consequences of their belief are. Allaah says:
ııııııııııı ııııııııııııı ıııı ıııı ııııııı ııııııııııı ıııı ııııııııııııı
"They are like cattle, nay even more astray; those! They are the heedless ones." 7:179
The best book I have seen which deals with Western atheist and secular belief is the following:
http://www.sacredfreedom.com/
The author has discussed these issues in a very clear and beautiful way. I hope you find it beneficial.
|
|
| UmarTheFloridian
|
|
|
|
Aboo Sifr Daniel bin Adam
(Al-Ahsa, Eastern Province, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia)
|
|
Member
Posts: 53
Joined: Sep 2008
|
Being a former atheist myself who came to Islaam six years ago and to the Sunnah and Salafiyyah two years ago walhamdu lillaah, I am very happy to see your inquiry.
Obviously those who can best answer your questions are the 'ulama, those truly learned in this religion, as they can offer you answers that those without knowledge such as myself simply cannot. I believe it was Shaykh 'Abdur Razzaaq al-'Abbaad who wrote a good piece you may find in English on the proof of tawheed? Though I could be mistaken on the author wallaahu a'lam.
However, I can share my story and what led me to accept the fact of there being a Creator. Look to the 'ulama first and foremost for knowledge but if you ever need someone to just chat with, feel free to PM me.
|
|
| al.Balqaanee
|
|
|
|
Abū Sulaymān Hamza ibn Hamdī Kantarević
(Cairo, Egypt / Grand Rapids, MI)
|
|
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Feb 2006
|
Greetings,
There is a article on www.sunnahpublishing.net titled:
Orthodox Muslim Scholars on Darwinism and the Theory of Evolution Text
And also, you might find some lectures that might be beneficial in your quest at www.sunnahaudio.com
All it takes is to browse around a bit through the different authentic sources.
www.islaam.ca is also an excellent starting point for individuals who seek the type of answers such as you do ...
Abu Sulaymaan Hamzah ibn Hamdee al-Balqaanee
"Knowledge will not give you something from itself, until you give all of yourself to it."
|
|
| abu.iyaad
|
|
|
|
Member
Posts: 182
Joined: Sep 2002
|
Bobby, since the late 70s and 80s there has been an increase in the number of scientists and academics acknowledging that there must be a creator in order to account for the universe. Due to the advancements made in the fields of genetics and cosmology, the acceptance of a creator is inevitable. Theories such as evolution are no longer tenable. Evolutionists have faced growing opposition over the last two decades due to undeniable implications of the discoveries in genetics and cosmology.
For your information, one of the great figureheads of contemporary atheism, Anthony Flew, announced in 2004 that he is no longer an atheist and has accepted the existence of a creator.
This sent shock waves through "militant atheism" and his former colleagues began to attack and vilify him. I recently read his book called "There is a God - How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind".
Although Flew accepts that there must be a creator, he has not committed to any religion. In his book when one looks at the reasons, considerations or the specific arguments that led him to recant from atheism, you will find that they are not too far off from the implications of the meanings of these verses in the Qur'an in Surah at-Tur:
"Were they created by nothing? Or were they themselves the creators? Or did they create the heavens and the earth, they do not have any firm conviction"
If you look at the tafseer (explanation) of this verse you will find the wording in these verses can provide the following meanings:
- Were they created by nothing, i.e. without an originator or creator
- Were they created from nothing or as inanimate matter - i.e. without a father or mother, and not by way of an embryo in its various stages, and not from sperm and ovum, were they created as inanimate beings
- Were they created without any purpose or end goal i.e. is there no end goal or purpose to their lives
- Were they creators of themselves (they would never and cannot claim this)
- Were they the creators of the heavens and the earth (they would never and cannot claim this)
The answers to all the questions are in the negative which leads to only one conclusion.
Flew says on page 88-89:
 | quote: |
| Why do I believe this, given that I expounded and defended atheism for more than half a century? The short answer is this: this is the world picture as I see it, that has emerged from modern science. Science spotlights three dimensions of nature that point to God. The first is the fact that nature obeys laws. The second is the dimension of life, of intelligently organized and purpose-driven beings, which arose from matter. The third, is the very existence of nature..." |
|
He also says, no page 89, | quote: |
| "My departure from atheism was not occasioned by any new phenomenon or argument. Over the last two decades my whole framework of thought has been in a stage of migration. This was a consequence of my continuing assessment of the evidence of nature ...". |
|
And some of the chapter headings in his book include,
- Who wrote the laws of nature?
- Did the universe know we were coming?
- How did life go live?
- Did something come from nothing?
Now I would not normally make mention or use of the recantation of any atheist. However, since Flew describes himself as the "most notorious atheist" who is in fact regarded as such by his peers, and that in the circles of contemporary atheism, Flew's paper, "Theology and Falsification" written over 50 years has probably been the most important work that invigorated and revived the atheistic academic assault in the decades to follow - I have made mention of his departure from atheism.
I've mentioned Flew here to illustrate the point that your conclusion that there cannot be a God, which you described as logical is a very subjective judgement.
You should also note that when many of the contemporary arrogant atheists noticed this trend over the last twenty years, they stepped up their efforts to win the attention of the general population, fearing that they might follow this growing realization against academics and scientists of the failure of Darwinian Evolution and atheist philosophy to provide sufficient answers. They have been labelled the "New Atheists" and their movement, "New Atheism". This includes people like Richard Dawkins who is the more popular and outspoken of this group.
I also read Dawkins "the God Delusion" as it was so highly promoted. When you get to the crux of his argument in the hundreds of pages that are often filled with sarcasm, insults, mockery, and so on, he says that the issue of intelligent design, or that the argument that there is purpose-driven intelligent design evidenced in nature does cause a big problem (i.e. its an issue that cannot be brushed aside easily by atheists) however, "natural selection" is an alternative, so why can't we just accept "natural selection" as an alternative to accepting God. That's the essence of what he is saying - not much substance at all.
Most of the writings of these "new atheists" use ad hominem attacks, sarcasm and mockery in order make atheism the mainstream amongst the general population. The wave of books that have appeared to promote atheism in recent years are just books aimed at the general populace, to sway them and keep from away from the reality of there being a creator.
If you research into the atheism of the last century you will realise that one of the biggest ideas found early in the 20th century to support atheism was logical positivism, the general idea of which is that the only statements that are true and meaningful are those that can be verified by sense experience - and that anything that cannot be verified by sense experience cannot be affirmed. This was later abandoned by its main proponent (A.J. Ayers) as being untenable, and atheists were then looking for the "next big thing" in atheist philosophy - until Flew came with his famous paper. You have to understand that these people from their arrogance, presume that atheism is the standard, and from that point proceed to find arguments, or invent philosophies that will support them in their conclusion. So you will see that they have "no real conviction" in anything. They are in fact internally confused, contradictory and do not have any firm standing.
They are as Allaah has stated, "Were they created by nothing? Or were they themselves the creators? Or did they create the heavens and the earth, they do not have any firm conviction"
After having said all this there are important points to mention:
It is not a requirement that a Muslim "prove" his faith by way of scientific proofs for the existence of Allaah. Unfortunately this is a methodology promoted by some modernists - they claim that unless a Muslim is able to furnish scientific proofs for the existence of their Lord, that their faith (Imaan) is deficient. This is a false claim.
The first obligation is to actually declare one's faith in in Allaah, not to learn scientific proofs after having assumed a position of doubt.
Secondly, in the Qur'an where are we enjoined to reflect upon the natural phenomena around us, this is in order for us to reflect, ponder and as a consequence affirm His sole right to be worshipped. The proof of the existence of a Creator by way of the the creation is not the primary issue, as that is a matter that is beyond doubt, as Allaah has said in Surah Ibrahim, "Is there any doubt concerning Allaah, the Originator and creator of the heavens and earth?". When we look at the explanations of such verses in the Qur'an we find the orthodox Muslim commentators explain how these natural phenomena are a proof that the sole right for all forms of worship belong to Allaah, and Allaah alone. Thus, the primary purpose in reflection upon the creation is to acknowledge that none has the right to be worshipped except Allaah alone, and not to merely affirm that He is the creator and originator.
So when we are involved in the discussion of the existence of a creator, we need to bear these things in mind. |
|
ııı ıııı ıııı ıı ıııı ıııı .-=abu.iyaad=-.
-=amjad bin muhammad=-
-rafiq-
|
|
| UmarTheFloridian
|
|
|
|
Aboo Sifr Daniel bin Adam
(Al-Ahsa, Eastern Province, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia)
|
|
Member
Posts: 53
Joined: Sep 2008
|
Yaa Aboo 'Iyyad,
This New Atheism, of which I was a very militant part, is a new movement that historically is beginning to crumble and break down than many other groupings amongst the kuffaar.
Flew, who is now being attacked by these atheists from all sides for all sorts of hypocritical and bogus reasons, is a tremendous blow to those such as Daniel Dennet and Richard Dawkins, whose God Delusion book as you said is primarily filled with ad hominems and a number of dogmatic beliefs (which he claims to oppose on principle). Even the Christians, who are upon a false religion of kufr and shirk, and deists and agnostics, who are similar to Dawkins in their kufr and shirk, from the Western scientific community have already refuted his ideas.
Jazakumullaahu khayran to all of those such as Abu 'Iyyad who have contributed to this. Bobby, you may be at the beginning of a very important part of your life in accepting the true and pure Islaam, the acceptance of tawheed and the Sunnah free from any innovative strings. Please give it serious and sincere consideration, I guarantee you will not find anything more correct than Islaam.
|
|
| abu.iyaad
|
|
|
|
Member
Posts: 182
Joined: Sep 2002
|
Umar, jazaakAllaahu khayran for your reply.
I did want to post something else from Flew's book in my previous post but it would have been too long to put in that post.
Back in 1989/1990 I attended a series of lectures at the famous Royal Institute in London. The series ran over a few days, and the presenter (I cannot really remember who it was, but it may well have been Richard Dawkins himself) went through what is known as "the Monkey Experiment". He ran a computer simulation showing that if a group of monkeys typed on a computer keyboard long enough they could produce a word. From this it is inferred that an entire book could be typed out, merely by chance.
This is a favourite of the proponents of natural selection. I'll quote here from Flew's book pages 75-78:
I was particularly impressed with Gerry Shroeder's point-by-point refutation of what I call the "monkey theorem". This idea which has been presented in a number of forms and variations, defends the possibility of life arising by chance using the analogy of a multitude of monkeys banging away on computer keyboards and eventually ending up writing a Shakespearean sonnet.
Schroeder first referred to an experiment conducted by the British National Council of Arts. A computer was placed in a cage with six monkeys. After one month of hammering away at it (as well as using it as a bathroom), the monkeys produced fifty typed pages - but not a single word. Shroeder noted that this was the case even though the shortest word in the English language is one letter (a or I). A is only a word if there is a space on either side of it. If we take it that the keyboard has thirty characters (the twenty-six letters and other symbols), then the likelihood of getting a one-letter word is 30 times 30 times 30, which is 27,000. The likelihood of getting a one-letter word is one chance out of 27,000.
Schroeder then applied the probabilities to the sonnet analogy. "What's the change of getting a Shakespearean sonnet?" he asked. He continued:
| quote: |
All the sonnets are the same length. They're by definition fourteen lines long. I picked the one I knew the opening line for, "Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?" I counted the number of letters; there are 488 letters in that sonnet. What's the likelihood of hammering away and getting 488 letters in the exact sequence as in "Shall I Compare Thee to a Summer's Day?"? What you end up with is 26 multiplied by itself 388 times - or 26 to the 488th power. Or in other words, in base 10, 10 to the 690th power.
[Now] the number of particles in the universe - not grains of sand, I'm talking about protons, electrons, and neutrons - is 10 to the 80th. Ten to the 80th is 1 with 80 zeros after it. There are not enough particles in the universe to write down the trials, you would be off by a factor of 10 to the 600th.
If you took the entire universe and converted it to computer chips - forget the monkeys - each one weighing a millionth of a gram and had each computer chip able to spin out 488 trials at, say, a million times a second; if you turn the entire universe into these microcomputer chips and these chips were spinning a million times a second [producing] random letters, the number of trials you would get since the beginning of time woul be 10 to the 90th trials. It would be off again by a factor of 10 to the 600th. You will never get a sonnet by chance. The universe would have to be 10 to the 600th times larger. Yet the world just thinks the monkeys can do it every time |
|
After hearing Schroeder's presentation, I told him that he had very satisfactorily and decisively established that the "monkey theorem" was a load of rubbish, and that it was particularly good to do it just with a sonnet; the theorem is sometimes proposed using the works of Shakespeare or a single play such as Hamlet. If the theorem won't work for a single sonnet, then of course, its absurd to suggest the more elaborate feat of the origin of life could have been achieved by chance. (Flew, There is a God, pp 75-78)
From this quote from Flew's book we can see how ridiculous this actually is.
In addition to this, if for example a word was randomly produced then that word would only be meaningful to an external form of intelligence. In other words this experiment must assume that there is already life and meaning, perception and understanding in existence for that so called random word creation to be recognized as a meaningful randomly created word. Even the underlying design of this experiment falsifies the intended conclusion behind it.
Whatever the case, Bobby, I'll give you some good advice that will save you from wasting weeks, months, or even years of wrangling around:
There is no logical argument for the absence of a creator. The presumption is the existence of a creator, and the deniers have to prove there isn't one. They can't, unless they resort to ridiculous monkey experiments, and "thought experiments". The universe itself gives lie to them.
So I invite you to affirm that there is none which has the right to be worshipped except Allaah alone, without any partners, and thereafter to learn of the Beautiful Names and Lofty Attributes of Allaah, the Originator and Creator of the heavens and the earth.
As there is no logical case for denying a creator, I know that if you have any other obstacles in your mind, they are most likely emotional arguments. Such as if there is a creator, why is there so much evil and so on. These are merely emotional arguments - they are not logical - they arise due to the absence of the correct knowledge and sound understanding that would allow these emotional obstacles to be easily resolved.
To this end, you should study in depth the principles of the sound Islamic creed, the issues of faith (imaan) and al-qadr (divine decree) and this knowledge will help relieve you of such obstacles.
And Allaah knows best. |
|
ııı ıııı ıııı ıı ıııı ıııı .-=abu.iyaad=-.
-=amjad bin muhammad=-
-rafiq-
|
|
| sajid_chauhan_81
|
|
|
|
unspecified ساجد
(Mumbai (India))
|
|
Member
Posts: 2031
Joined: Jul 2005
|
Few quotes from Charles Darwin:-
ıIn my most extreme fluctuations I have never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God.ı (Letter to John Fordyce, May 7 1879)
ıI am sorry to have to inform you that I do not believe in the Bible as a divine revelation, & therefore not in Jesus Christ as the son of God.ı (Letter to Frederick McDermott, November 24 1880)
[In conversation with the atheist Edward Aveling, 1881] ıWhy should you be so aggressive? Is anything gained by trying to force these new ideas upon the mass of mankind?ı (Edward Aveling, The religious views of Charles Darwin, 1883)
ıThe mystery of the beginning of all things is insoluble by us; and I for one must be content to remain an Agnostic.ı (Autobiography)
May Allaah guide you and us and may He keep us firm upon Islaam and give us a good end. Aameen.
|
|
| al.Balqaanee
|
|
|
|
Abū Sulaymān Hamza ibn Hamdī Kantarević
(Cairo, Egypt / Grand Rapids, MI)
|
|
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: Feb 2006
|
Bobby,
There are a some things that need to be pointed out as well, you must realize that the militant atheists, know perfectly well that not one single branch of science has supported their theory and that the whole concept is totally bogus.
Yet for the sake of ideology, and perhaps because it is expected from them, and of course materialistic gains they continue to defend the theory, even while some of their elite confess that its invalid.
Dr. Robert Milikan who is a Nobel Prize winner and renowned evolutionist said:
| quote: |
"The pathetic thing is that we have scientists who are trying to prove evolution, which no scientist can ever prove."
|
|
Norman Macbeth, a Harvard-trained lawyer, has made the study of Darwinian theory his avocation for many years:
| quote: |
Unfortunately, in the field of evolution most explanations are not good. As a matter of fact, they hardly qualify as explanations at all; they are suggestions, hunches, pipe dreams, hardly worthy of being called hypotheses.
|
|
Dr. Nils Heribert-Nilsson, is a Swedish geneticist and Professor of Botany at the University of Lund in Sweden:
| quote: |
My attempts to demonstrate evolution by an experiment carried on for more than 40 years have completely failed. At least I should hardly be accused of having started from any preconceived anti-evolutionary standpoint.
|
|
It is just as Allaah, the One who created you and me, and tho Whom we will return, without a doubt, tells us:
"... they do not have any firm conviction"
You must realize that no scientist, Darwinist or not, can suggest that the theory of evolution is proven.
The theory of evolution is what it is, a theory, an assumption based on limited information and knowledge, something taken to be true without proof ... in other words - it is a big hoax ...
Bobby, it is always possible to abondon denial, the denial that Allaah does not exist or the denial that Allaah is the only one who is worthy of being worshiped in truth, but the ones who insist upon their denial they are the ones who will suffer eternal punishment ...
Except those who repent and do righteous deeds, and openly declare (the truth which they concealed). These, I will accept their repentance. And I am the One Who accepts repentance, the Most Merciful. Verily, those who disbelieve, and die while they are disbelievers, it is they on whom is the Curse of Allaah and of the angels and of mankind, combined They will abide therein (under the curse in Hell), their punishment will neither be lightened, nor will they be reprieved. (Al-Baqarah 2:160 - 162
Greetings,
al-Balqaanee
|
|
| MBobby
|
|
|
|
M. Bobby Usman Ibn Soliman
(Yorkshire)
|
|
Member
Posts: 3
Joined: Sep 2008
|
Salaam.
Thank you brothers for your responses I did read them, but time did not permit to respond earlier as I was researching more profoundly.
Regards,
|
|
|
30-09-2008 @ 11:49 PM
10-10-2008 @ 1:25 AM